Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

My Depth Chart (For your Convenience--Top 10 needs included)


MHS831
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

I’d put Center as a priority need. There’s no way Austin Corbett is plan A at center. If they don’t add one in FA they will definitely draft one.

I thought long and hard about that, but we do have an established lineman there--Lemme see what everyone else says, but I see your point--is it a top 10 need?  I figure we have the picks and room to address about 10 needs. But they did not just pay tons for 2 guards to have a weak link at C. 

Edited by MHS831
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Krovvy said:

Center is definitely a need. Corbett could be a decent option or maybe he has trouble. Either way we're a single injury away from having a serious question mark at a very important position.

 

No, but if you had 10 players considering our situation across the board, is C a top 10?  While C is an uncertainty, we have indisputable needs for starters in the following areas:

Starter Needs

Edge

CB

SS

WR

TE

I am not disagreeing with you, but we also need depth a ILB, CB, CB, RB, FS. so is a position with an established OL and even a backup in year 3 still that big of a need?  Every team has its weak spots--I see the point being made

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Billy Goat said:

I think quality of depth is important to note in this kind of thing. I mean we have two bodies at center but Corbett is a complete unknown and if he were to get injured you wouldn't want Mays starting for a prolonged period.

I know--this bothers me--why spend $$$$ on 2 guards and have a C by default?  Listening to everyone, man this roster is bare.  Everyone is making good points. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

That whole defense looks pretty rough. We are about 1-2 injuries away from being in shambles.

Hopefully we aren't done in free agency yet.

This scared me.  I realize we have more free agency, the draft, and then even undrafted free agents---I still do not see how they are going to field a decent team===and then there is the QB question mark at best.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...